Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?

[stinkcat_14]

How does that make it hard to cheat?

Very simple, if you neglect to include a w-2 or a 1099 on your tax return, you will get a letter in the mail, telling you of your error. It makes it harder to cheat and get away with it.

All of this is meaningless without actual numbers and is pure speculation.

Not totally meaningless. After all, it is reasonable to assume that most people are reasonably honest on their tax returns, and that cheating is more likely to occur under two situations:

1. there is an opportunity to cheat.
2. the benefit of cheating exceeds the cost.

Now of course, some of the cheating is done by poor people. If you work in a business for cash under the table, that of course is cheating. But the poor aren’t going to be able to defraud the government out of $350 billion.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Very simple, if you neglect to include a w-2 or a 1099 on your tax return, you will get a letter in the mail, telling you of your error. It makes it harder to cheat and get away with it.

Not totally meaningless. After all, it is reasonable to assume that most people are reasonably honest on their tax returns, and that cheating is more likely to occur under two situations:

1. there is an opportunity to cheat.
2. the benefit of cheating exceeds the cost.

Now of course, some of the cheating is done by poor people. If you work in a business for cash under the table, that of course is cheating. But the poor aren’t going to be able to defraud the government out of $350 billion.

Is that how research is done in your university, with untested assumptions and not facts?

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by JRKH
stinkcat made no such conclusion as you have assumed. He asked a question regarding the gathering of excessive wealth and the perils to ones soul which that entails.

Because he was asking a question regarding the ability to make a huge amount of money without compromising principles i.e. commiting sin.

Why does he harp on the supposed immorality of the “filthy rich?”

He didn’t bring it up - You did based on what you read into his post.

Suppose he asked, "Is it possible to be a <Jew, Catholic, Black> without losing your soul? Would you not consider that an attack on Jews, Catholics, or Blacks? And if he worked in the adjective “filthy?”

There is no way to equate the two, therefore the statement is meaningless.

What do you take this question to imply: Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?

Is he implying that rich are so **good **they lose their souls?

When I read a question/post - I READ the QUESTION/POST. I don’t look for any implications.
IF he were implying I really don’t know.

As for crime, the FBI statistics make it clear – most crime is concentrated among the lowest socio-economic classes. I didn’t make it that way, it is that way.

And what do these statistics/facts have to do with the actual question asked???

Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?

“Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?”

Take a DEEEEP Breath.
Then READ the Question, and ONLY the question.
Then ANSWER the Question - And ONLY the Question.

This should be real easy - After all it is really a yes or no question.
Come on Vern - You can do it

Peace
James

 

[stinkcat_14]

Is that how research is done in your university, with untested assumptions and not facts?

Research for a web bulletin board, absolutely. When you publish a refereed article, let me know and then we can talk about research methodology.

 

[JRKH]

Since you used the term, and since you knew some might be offended, clearly you meant to offend.

Vern - If you are offended by the term Filthy Rich, which is a common enough term I suggest you run right home and take a shower.
As Stinkcat said, you are the only one who seems to be offended by it.

Peace
James

 

[vern_humphrey]

Because he was asking a question regarding the ability to make a huge amount of money without compromising principles i.e. commiting sin.

And inferring the answer. Why else use the adjective “filthy?” Why else harp on the supposed immorality of the “filthy rich?”

The answer to the question is, it is possible to become very wealthy and to do great good in the process – especially when it comes to creating the jobs that other people need for their livelihood.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Vern - If you are offended by the term Filthy Rich, which is a common enough term I suggest you run right home and take a shower.
As Stinkcat said, you are the only one who seems to be offended by it.

Peace
James

JRKH - If you are offended by the “N-word,” which is a common enough term I suggest you run right home and take a shower.

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by JRKH
Because he was asking a question regarding the ability to make a huge amount of money without compromising principles i.e. commiting sin.

Amazing - Simply Amazing!!! How DO you do it. How DO you infer something that no one else does, not even the OP. Simply Amazing.

Since the Original poster stated in the ORIGINAL POST, that He used teh term Filthy Rich simply to generate interest in the thread; That it dies nOT relate to the Point of the OP, How can it infer anything except a ploy to get your attention.
As Far as “Harping” I suggest you take a look at the succession of posts. It is your post number 13 which began the discussion of equating rich - poor - honest - cheat - moral - immoral etc.

**The answer to the question is, it is possible to become very wealthy and to do great good in the process **-- especially when it comes to creating the jobs that other people need for their livelihood.

Good Job Vern. :clapping:

Now basing on your answer above, Is it also possible for a person to become very wealthy, go great good in creating jobs etc, and still lose his own sould?

Peace
James

 

[vern_humphrey]

Amazing - Simply Amazing!!! How DO you do it. How DO you infer something that no one else does, not even the OP. Simply Amazing.

Amazing - Simply Amazing!!! How DO you do it. How DO you tolerate and defend bigotry?

Since the Original poster stated in the ORIGINAL POST, that He used teh term Filthy Rich simply to generate interest in the thread;

And would you defend him if he used the term “N-word” simply to generate interest?

This thread is an exercise in envy – people who are financially successful are baaaaaaad people. And we don’t need to prove it, we merely need to assume it.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Because he was asking a question regarding the ability to make a huge amount of money without compromising principles i.e. commiting sin.

I remember one time reading the autobiography of a billionaire, who at the end of his life, lamented the fact he really neglected his family in the process of becoming wealthy. He would work 6-7 days a week, early morning to late evening. He also insisted that his lieutenants work much the same hours that he did, and that loyalty to the company came before anything else. What really struck me was that, he worked so hard for money that neither he nor his family will never spend. Seems kind of stupid if you ask me, to neglect your family for money you don’t need.

Now of course, perhaps this guy was a bad apple. Perhaps most billionaires never sin on the way to their wealth. But is seems to me that if one were to set out with the goal to acquire extreme wealth, this and other sins might become a real temptation. Of course, just because I ask the question, I get accused (fortunately by a tiny minority) of having something against the rich.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I remember one time reading the autobiography of a billionaire, who at the end of his life, lamented the fact he really neglected his family in the process of becoming wealthy. He would work 6-7 days a week, early morning to late evening. He also insisted that his lieutenants work much the same hours that he did, and that loyalty to the company came before anything else. What really struck me was that, he worked so hard for money that neither he nor his family will never spend. Seems kind of stupid if you ask me, to neglect your family for money you don’t need.

Now of course, perhaps this guy was a bad apple. Perhaps most billionaires never sin on the way to their wealth. But is seems to me that if one were to set out with the goal to acquire extreme wealth, this and other sins might become a real temptation. Of course, just because I ask the question, I get accused (fortunately by a tiny minority) of having something against the rich.

Gee. I know people who neglect their families who are not billionaires.

But I guess if you’re prejudiced against the “filthy rich,” everything is grist for the mill.

 

[stinkcat_14]

But I guess if you’re prejudiced against the “filthy rich,” everything is grist for the mill.

Who are you prejudiced against Vern? When come clean with your own issues, then I will listen to your chatter about my supposed prejudices.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Who are you prejudiced against Vern?

I’m not prejudiced against anyone, stinkcat.

When come clean with your own issues, then I will listen to your chatter about my supposed prejudices.

Once again demonstrating if you want to make a prejudiced person angry, simply refuse to be prejudiced yourself.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Ok Vern, instead of calling me prejudiced, why don’t you address the issue I raised. Here it is:

But is seems to me that if one were to set out with the goal to acquire extreme wealth, this and other sins might become a real temptation. Of course, just because I ask the question, I get accused (fortunately by a tiny minority) of having something against the rich.

If you want to have a net worth exceeding $100 million, can you do it working 9-5? Are there sins that become a real temptation if you choose to seek wealth?

 

[vern_humphrey]

If you want to have a net worth exceeding $100 million, can you do it working 9-5? Are there sins that become a real temptation if you choose to seek wealth?

Why would you assume that a successful businessman would be more likely to sin than a successful surgeon, airline pilot, or college professor?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

You only say things like that because you’ve let your mindset be polluted by simplistic, PROTESTANT either/or style thinking.

You know, I looked in the dictionary and found a perfect description for the way you act, vern:

“a blustering browbeating person”

The word is bully.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

You only ask questions like that because you’ve let your mindset be polluted by simplistic, PROTESTANT either/or style thinking.

You’re the one that seems to adhere to the Calvinist idea that being rich is inherently good and that being poor means that you have a greater prediliction to being a criminal.

Then again, your bullying tactics are now exposed. You fit this definition perfectly: “a blustering browbeating person.”

Grow up.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I am sure you meant to respond to this?

Vern’s posts, in this case, don’t warrant a response because they are nothing more than attempt to bully someone who thinks different than he does into silence.

He made a statement and I called him out on it. He can’t answer it, so he resorts to his usual, childish bullying tactics. I wish the admins would do something about it…I wonder why they don’t.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Research for a web bulletin board, absolutely. When you publish a refereed article, let me know and then we can talk about research methodology.

Remember, the standard a right winger, such as vern, sets for people who disagree with them is to have a minimum 50 different, independent sources that have been properly vetted by another right-wing source for lack of bias, properly annotated along with a notarized note from God Himself. On the other hand, anything they say is automatically gospel, even if it comes from highly biased sources such as FAUXNews, the Limbaugh show or pulled directly from their hind quarters.

It’s a total double standard.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Remember, the standard a right winger, such as vern, sets for people who disagree with them is to have a minimum 50 different, independent sources that have been properly vetted by another right-wing source for lack of bias, properly annotated along with a notarized note from God Himself. On the other hand, anything they say is automatically gospel, even if it comes from highly biased sources such as FAUXNews, the Limbaugh show or pulled directly from their hind quarters.

It’s a total double standard.

You’re just saying that because you’ve let your mindset be polluted by simplistic, PROTESTANT either/or style thinking.